I wasn't suggesting that you are lazy. I was saying that it's kind of a lazy question. But probably it would be more accurate to say that it's a really broad question -- and one that is likely to elicit general responses or flippant comments. Oh where would one even begin?

If you want better answers you must start with better questions..

I don't think there's a Box Studios method, but if you can identify a few specific things that you think they're doing particularly well you might get some more useful responses (as compared to flippant ones).

Probably easier to demystify it one chunk at a time.

There is certainly a considerable talent pool in RetouchPRO to draw on and to cross-pollinate ideas and share working methods. And much to be learned.

But then there is something to be said for actually working together in the same place every day in an environment where you can compare notes and share ideas in real time and even occasionally watch over one another's shoulders.

Add to that environment that everyone is entering with high level skills and everyone has an adeptness to learning new techniques. That makes for an incredible learning environment.

Why does this matter so much?
This and other threads likes this
The Trick !
Hard Work and ORIGINALITY
Not what someone else is doing
zganie

Who was asking for a trick? The question is about technique. Originality? Is it now unoriginal to use Photoshop for retouching?

It's been hard work discovering the above mentioned techniques while sifting through the many threads here in RPro and Google and I was hoping this thread could consolidate some 'high end' techniques and moves that some of the best retouching studios use on a daily basis.

Might be a good idea to describe your own working methods and techniques and then ask for people to add to that. That way you'll be putting something real for people to learn from and respond to. Seems like that would be more interesting than vaguely asking what Pascal is doing (especially since no one seems to really know what he's doing in the Box). Wouldn't seem like a vague open-ended question. Wouldn't seem like Box Studios envy. And would likely get you some terrific feedback on specifically what you're doing and not doing.

When I use a 50% gray layer / set to Soft Light....many times when I paint with white on skin to dodge I get a *stroke* of reddish artifact. Any ideas where I'm going wrong?

Thanks

Thank you for understanding.

When I have a problem like that I just ignore it and get my "carving" or dodge and burning done. Get a good nice shape, then go in and fix those discolored areas afterwards with a Curve adjustment layer. So just lasso (with a nice feather) that area that is reddish and bring up a Curve lum and bring down the red channel.

I've carefully read all your posts in this thread, and I'm aware of some of the things that you've come across that aren't fully explained in the commonly available literature. Let's call that list that you've requoted so generously (as if it's evidence that you're using your brain) "Five Things That Weren't Readily Apparent To You". I assume that some or all of these are now clear to you but once were not -- or is that a list of things you'd like explained?

And I suppose that any one of those items would be worthy of discussion.

But the list is hardly an explanation of your approach to dealing with images. It's not even an explanation of any of those techniques. It's just a list, and it's not helping to answer your questions. It's just a list of techniques without any kind of context or explanation.

If you're looking to recreate or demystify a high-end retouching process and to discover new techniques, then you need to have some place to start. (Since Pascal hasn't sent a twelve-step primer for us all to consult as to his proprietary dark arts working methods...) I thought since you started the thread that it might make sense to take your workflow and then have people add on to that or make suggestions as to alternate approaches or refinements.

And maybe that would lead to a general workflow and a collection of techniques and methods that people could refer to all in one place.

I am not questioning your intelligence or your ambitions for discovery and learning. And I never suggested that you weren't using your brain. I was actually defending you earlier in this thread when someone suggested that you weren't.

I'm just trying to help focus the question and to get a sense of what you're doing so maybe you can actually get some useful answers. But it's hard to give directions to someone who's not explaining where they are or where they're trying to go. I'm looking for a some reference points, so that people have a question to respond to or at least something real to react to.

But what you are currently saying isn't making sense to me. It's as if you're saying (and you'll have to forgive my digression here):

It still doesn't give you anything to really respond to so you get an answer that is something like "Passion, power and precision" or "Late nights with beautiful women and lots of espresso in the morning" -- and these answers wouldn't help you to understand how they make a Ferrari. But people will often answer a question in exactly the way it is designed to be answered.

If I were to outline my approach it would probably look something like this...

Look at the image carefully to understand what's working and what's not.
Determine a plan of action/vision as to what you want to do with the image.
(what needs to be "fixed" and the overall look, mood and feeling of the image)
Replace, move, and change parts.
Extend areas as needed.
Cloning. Healing.
Skin Work. Fabric Work.
Selective adjustments.
Dodge and Burn.
Overall adjustments.
Walk away.
Look at it fresh and make adjustments/refinements as needed.

That's not getting into any specific methods or techniques, and I don't always work in that particular order (and there will be cases with more general steps), but it's a beginning of breaking the retouching down into a step by step process or framework that can then be fleshed out with the particulars of method/technique and then refined with alternative approaches for different situations.

Compare two questions:

How does Dave Hill do it?

How does Dave Hill get that sharp detail and nearly monochromatic look in his images?

The first question will get you an incredibly wide range of answers (some flippant, some trying to give you a serious response), but most of which won't address your desire to learn the techniques being used. The second is asking a much narrower question that is likely to yield a more specific response.